san kumar parihar

I would like to know how ranchers perceive OCMJEA certification as - "Solution architect" or "Enterprise Architect" certification? I am already OCMJEA certified but never paid close attention to how Oracle markets it.

Oracle says this certification is for enterprise architects but in my opinion, you can call it any type of architect certification but not "Enterprise Architect".

I am able to see my result as "PASS" (150/160) on PearsonVUE site though I have not recieived the email yet. This forum has really been a great learning platform which is beyond OCMJEA certification.
I submitted my assignment (gemstone international) on 24th September and appeared on essay exam on 27th September.

Thankyou you all.

Thanks a lot Rishi. Any idea on my 2nd query? Do we actually see the result of part-1 anywhere?

Dear Ranchers - Please answer these queries. There is only one week left to submit assignment and take part-3.

1)
I have Oracle Testing ID (Prometric ID): SR****** (I see this in part-1 score report provided by Prometric)
I also have Oracle Testing ID: OC****** (seen in Pearson VUE account)

Not sure if I messed it up (while creating CertView and VUE accounts) but is "Oracle Testing ID" same as "Prometric ID" for those who set up the VUE accounts properly?

Which ID do I use in the assignment jar while uploading it?

2) Do we get to see the result of part-1 anywhere (CertView or Pearson)? If yes then I probably need to get the IDs merged as recommended in Oracle Vendor Transition FAQ.

Is it required to depict connectivity to vendor systems in deployment diagram? Shouldn't deployment diagram just be showing physical deployed of artifacts internal to SuD?

Do we need to show all the JPA entities in the Integration tier? For me that would mean showing almost every class that I have in the class diagram (for domain model). I feel justified with DAOs (for external communications) but not sure if showing every JPA entity is really required.

Has anyone used component based design especially w.r.t domain model. I have entities which can logically be broken down into three components (with some dependency order). I have choice to show everything as one unit (in component and deployment diagram) or split them into three. I am not showing the same split for the service as SuD requires services from one part alone. Other two parts are provided in domain model but are not really used for the given use cases.

PS: I have definitely seen some merits using this approach in real life but not sure if this level of details are needed in the assignment.

IMHO, those who are about to complete their assignments, should not really rush for 27th August. It's wise to spend 2 extra weeks and submit quality work. Those who have submitted the assignment (but have not done part 3) should definitely target to do the essay before 27th August.

Should we mark classes that represent master data with @entity annotation. Though assigment does not indicate to build any admin application to maintain the master data, the fact is master data belongs same domain model as transactional data, and is being referred in the SuD.

As an example, characteristics classes (describing Wood, Steel & Concrete) in JustBuildIt assignment from Cade/sheil's. What is the justification for these not having @entity annotation?

For your first assumption, either of EJB or webservice should be fine.. But for second one, you need to have some security considerations. Transport level security may not be required within LAN but request still needs to be authenticated and authorized.

Will - If "return" arrow (as you depicted) is synchronous invocation to Output.jsp from OtherStuff, then will Actor invoke same "execution occurance" on Output.jsp (verical rectangle running down) for the next activity? I hope that does not break any UML standard.

PS: I am using Rational Software Architect.

An action on Input.jsp returns Output.jsp as outcome to the Actor. How do we display this basic interaction in sequence diagram? By default the return arrow comes back to where we started from (which is Input.jsp) but that is not what actually happens.

Is it fair to remove the return arrow from Controller to Input.jsp
Actor --> Input.jsp --> Controller --> Backend

And then show:
Actor --> Output.jsp

Let me share my views (along with my own doubts) with an example:

In case of wood, every single instance of it has a particular color, density and machineability. This is not like products which usually have predefined properties (think about soap, laptop, cars etc). In this example, characterstics classes are telling which attributes are important but who will store their actual values?

a) If Wood@Entity has to store these details, then is it modeled correctly?
b) If WoodCharacteristics stores it then why is not an @Entity class?

Please share your views because I am struggling with a similar problem.

I hope I am not oversimplifying your problem but what you are saying is - Order can have many OrderEntry, and OrderEntry is described by a Type of "Good".
You refactored your model from:
Order -> Goods Type (* to *)

TO:

Order-->OrderEntry (1 to *)
OrderEntry --> Goods (* to 1) [As one Goods Type can describe multiple OrderEntry]

This is more or less similar to Figure 1 and Figure 2 as explained by Scott Ambler (see "Enrollment" association in link below) and seems to justify the original cardinality.
http://www.agilemodeling.com/artifacts/classDiagram.htm

Hope this helps.